facts and laws, should receive identical treatment and consideration, to ensure certainty and some level of prediction in the Law, and that is the whole essence of Judicial Discipline. Therefore, Learned Silk submitted that it is only logical that the fate, which befell the Kaduna Trial, ought also to befall this Court, as the act of the Prosecution in this case is speculative and suspicious and no amount of suspicion however strong, can ground a conviction. Moreover, a Court of Competent Jurisdiction in its Findings had found that no Funds were misappropriated and that estopped the Prosecution from continuing to contend the contrary. This is what Issue Estoppel and Res judicata entail and Courts must be seen to be consistent. In response, Learned Silk representing the Complainant, submitted that the Charges preferred against the Officials of AllStates Trust Bank were prescribed under Section 3 (2) (a) and 10 (6) of the Miscellaneous Offences Decree as Amended by the Tribunals (Certain Consequential Amendment etc.) Decree No 62 of 1999 AND SECTION 83 AND 97 (1) OF THE PENAL CODE ACT, LFN (ABUJA). These Sections referred to Counts 1 and 2 of the Kaduna Charge, which had to do with the unlawful acceptance of the Central Bank Cheque in the Sum of N1, 161, 162, 900 from Joshua Dariye, which they knew to be unlawfully procured by Chief Joshua Dariye. There is therefore, nothing in these provisions that prescribe the Offences of Criminal Breach of Trust or Criminal Misappropriation under Sections 315 and 309 of the Penal Code. Also from the Charge, the Six Defendants were charged with Conspiracy to do an illegal act, which is Criminal Misappropriation, by aiding Chief Joshua Dariye to dishonestly misappropriate to his own use, the proceeds of the value of the Central Bank Cheque drawn out in favour of Plateau State Government, under Sections 83, 97 (1) and 309 of the Penal Code. Liman J. had upheld the No-Case Submission on the grounds that the Prosecution did not prove that the Defendants knew that the Cheque was unlawfully procured by Governor Joshua Dariye under Counts 1 and 2. Further, the Prosecution did not prove that the Cheque was criminally misappropriated under Section 309, to make the Defendants liable for Conspiracy, in that it was not shown that the disbursement of the Fund was not the Official Act of the Plateau State Government. Further still, dishonesty was not proved. He stated the basis of this Finding to be that Joshua Dariye was not called upon to testify and it was difficult for the Trial Judge to hold that the Prosecutor had made out a case of Conspiracy and Abetment against the Defendant Bankers. Learned Silk for the Prosecution held the view that the contention by the Defence on Issue Estoppel was wrong for the following reasons: 1) As at the date of the Judgment in Exhibit D21B, the Defendant could not be prosecuted as he enjoyed immunity under Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution. He was not a Party to the Judgment in that case as he was not charged before the Federal High Court and he was still serving as the Governor of Plateau State. Therefore, by the nature of the immunity he enjoyed, the Defendant could not be charged to Court and no incriminating pronouncement could be made against him in any Court, while he was the Governor of Plateau State. He cited the cases of FAWEHINMI VS IGP (2002) 7 NWLR PT. 767, 606 AT 699-700 PER KALGO JSC, who held that Holders of Offices mentioned under Section 308 of the 1999 Constitution could only be investigated but not questioned, arrested or detained in connection to such investigation. However, the immunity was not forever from Full Criminal Investigation or any Criminal Proceedings in respect of any Offence allegedly committed by him or during the Tenure of his Office. 17